Man, I'm having a dickens of a time wording this reply like I want to... this is attempt 4.
Originally posted by EnigmaAgent
Like when you've added the word "evidence" in the fourth paragraph when the word "evidence" doesn't exist in the sentence you quoted. Only
Seems like you're weaving your own thoughts into the story.
First, let me say that you make valid points. I might have jumped a step or two forward in my conclusions, and read too much into his comments. But I
still contend my point stands.
As for the 4th paragraph that you referenced, you are right. Mostly. Trump never said "evidence." But, he also never said "Interesting news." It
is why I said I was paraphrasing the "quote." So, what was the real quote? "At a certain point in time I'll be revealing some interesting
This is where I may have jumped to conclusions. Since he sent people to Hawai'i to investigate the certificate situation with Obama, I figure that
those "interesting things" were about information about Obamas certificate. Another conclusion that I might have jumped to is that I went with the
assumption that the only info he would want would be something to prove Obama wrong and not as a way of defending Obama. While it's a longshot, it's
possible that his "interesting things" were proof that Obama was right from the start.
He also said that "You'll be very surprised" by what has been found (CNN interview with Ali Velshi). Again, since he was taking a birther stance,
it doesn't take a lot of imagination to assume this is negative info about the certificate.
Another quote: "I have people that have been studying it and they cannot believe what they're finding" (from an NBC interview). Again, the people
"studying" it were there more or less to look for proof it was fake or non-existent.
So, did I improperly use the word "evidence?" Well, maybe. But I think you are also being too narrow in your definition of "evidence."
"At a certain point in time I'll be revealing some interesting things."
"You'll be very surprised" with what we've found
"I have people that have been studying it and they cannot believe what they're finding."
He didn't use the actual word "evidence," but that sure as hell sounds like what he is implying. Even if that "evidence" ultimately isn't a
physical thing, but just information.
And if you still have a problem with my usage of "evidence" and/or "Interesting news" in my original post, just substitute in "interesting
things" if it will make you more comfortable.
(All quotes in this are from cnn.com
And the only reason I used them in particular was just because in a search, it was the very first one listed. The quotes are all over the net.)
Lastly, while I said it at the start, I'll say it again: EnigmaAgent, your general points were completely accurate. You are right with questioning
what I meant with the words I used.